Paws Up!

New York Assemblyman Blumencranz has proposed “Peanut’s Law: Humane Animal Protection Act” to strengthen protections for sanctuary animals seized by state law enforcement.

     The lives of sanctuary animals in New York may soon receive greater legal protection.

     A proposed amendment to Section 11-0512 of New York’s Environmental Conservation Law, known as Peanut’s Law: Humane Animal Protection Act, would change how the state handles animals seized from sanctuaries.

     The bill follows the widely reported case of Peanut the Squirrel. Peanut was a rehabilitated squirrel who gained a large following online. During an investigation by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), Peanut was seized and later euthanized.

  At NHES, we believe wild animals that can survive on their own should be released whenever possible. However, wildlife sanctuaries also serve an important purpose. Animals living in these facilities deserve humane and fair treatment.

 

What Would Peanut’s Law Change?

     One of the first goals of Peanut’s Law is to clearly define what qualifies as an animal sanctuary.

     Under the proposal, a sanctuary would include a wild animal care facility recognized under federal and state law and operating under a valid tax identification number, such as a 501(c)(3).

     This definition is important because it helps determine which organizations qualify for legal protections.

     Qualified sanctuaries would also have the right to an administrative hearing before animals are seized.

A 72-Hour Waiting Period

     If passed, Peanut’s Law would also change New York’s rules for euthanasia following an animal seizure.

     The bill would require a 72-hour waiting period before an animal could be euthanized. The only exception would involve an immediate public safety risk confirmed by a licensed veterinarian.

     During those 72 hours, families and sanctuary operators could file an emergency appeal with the DEC.

     An emergency review board would then examine the case. The board would include a licensed veterinarian, a public health official, and a sanctuary representative.

     Together, they would determine the most appropriate course of action.

More Transparency and Accountability

     Peanut’s Law would also create new reporting requirements for the DEC.

     The department would be required to publish quarterly reports explaining animal seizures and their outcomes.

     If euthanasia and rabies testing were necessary, the bill would also require those test results to be made public.

     If an animal tested negative for rabies, licensed sanctuaries would have the legal right to seek redress.

     These protections were inspired in part by Peanut’s case. The people who cared for him at P’Nuts Freedom Farm Animal Sanctuary had little legal recourse after he was seized and euthanized on the same day. Peanut later tested negative for rabies.

Protecting Animals While Addressing Public Safety

     In a letter to New York Governor Kathy Hochul, Assemblyman Blumencranz said he hopes Peanut’s Law will balance animal protection, public safety, and respect for sanctuary operators.

     The proposed bill could provide meaningful protections for animals living in licensed sanctuaries. However, it remains unclear whether New York lawmakers will ultimately support the legislation.

     In the meantime, there are still ways you can help wildlife in your own community.

     Support local conservation efforts, respect wildlife habitats, and contact qualified wildlife rehabilitators when an animal needs help. Small actions can reduce the number of wild animals that eventually require sanctuary care.

 

Paws Down!
March 21, 2020

Unfortunately, HB20-1084 did not pass the House Rural Affairs and Agriculture Committee.


At the beginning of 2020, Colorado Representative Monica Duran and Senator Mike Foote introduced HB20-1084, known as the Humane Pet Act, with the hopes to increase protection for animals who are bred by commercial breeders. This bill aimed to limit the number of animals a breeder could have, along with the number of times these animals could be bred in their lifespan. The bill did not pass. Some felt it was unnecessary due to the Pet Animal Care and Facilities Act (PACFA) that was already in place.

So what is PACFA?

PACFA is an inspection program implemented by the Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA) that was established in 1994 to help protect animals individuals acquire for pets. According to PACFA, pet animals are “dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, mice, rats, gerbils, ferrets, birds, fish, reptiles, amphibians, and invertebrates, or any other species of wild or domestic or hybrid animal sold, transferred, or retained for the purpose of being kept as a household pet.” (Livestock is exempt from this section.) This program is overseen by Colorado’s Commissioner of Agriculture with the aid of a 17 member advisory committee.

Is PACFA a reliable program?

In 2015, PACFA was audited by the Colorado Office of the State Auditor, where findings showed regular inspections were not given, and 19% of the licensed facilities were overdue. One of those facilities was deemed High risk requiring inspections every 6 months, but it was late by 28 months. One of the reasons for this inadequacy is Colorado’s vast region that is broken into five territories. For example, in Exhibit 2.5, an inspector responsible for the western part of Colorado will have more ground to cover than one responsible for the middle area. Another finding was complaint inspections were not conducted promptly, and better oversight of inspectors and their documentation of inspections using the USAHERDS database needed to be improved due to its limited functionality.

(Source: Adapted from the Colorado Office of the State Auditor’s Report #1418P)

Colorado’s Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) reviewed PACFA in 2018 and found some improvement since the audit in 2015. However, DORA still felt that more improvements were needed to adequately monitor the licensed facilities in Colorado by employing more inspectors. At that time, only seven inspectors were employed to help oversee around 2,500 facilities. Findings from the audit and review confirm that PACFA plays an essential role in increasing the protection for animals within the state–due to minimal protection from the Animal Welfare Act–but improvements were necessary to operate effectively. 


Is PACFA enough? 

Currently, there are 2,220 animal facilities licensed through PACFA, and 266 of those are animal breeders. Do you feel that the passage of the Humane Pet Act would have been unnecessary? If you are a Colorado resident and agree that more requirements should be put into place to safeguard the well-being of pet animals, please contact your legislator today!

Red squirrel sitting on a tree stump eating seeds.

Take Action

Contact Governor Hochul and show your support for Peanut’s Law.